Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the powerpc tree

From

Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>

Date

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:29:22 +1100

On Wed, 2012-03-14 at 09:53 +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:> > +#if defined(CONFIG_EEH)> > > +static inline struct eeh_dev *of_node_to_eeh_dev(struct device_node *dn)> > > +{> > > + return dn->edev;> > > +}> > > +#endif> > > > Ben, What is this? I don't want the eeh_dev pointer in struct device_node. Up to> > now we've avoided putting any reverse references into device_nodes. For everything> > else we use a reverse lookup, particularly for devices, to avoid growing the> > device_node for each new type of lookup.> > > > It's used to trace the EEH device. When EEH (Enhanced Error Hanlding) is enabled,> EEH device will be created against PCI sensitive OF node to trace the EEH state> accordingly. Since you don't want see this in struct device_node, we have to change> struct eeh_dev for a little bit to so that all struct eeh_dev instances will form> a global list and we can search eeh_dev according to the given device_node through> the global list. > > I don't know the policy or rule here for much. I think we can have 2 options.> > 1. Keep the code as being, and fix it later.> 2. Fix it now.

My bad, it's a mis-review, I thought it was still in pci_dn, I din'tcatch Gavin moving it to device-node.

Yes, Gavin, we need to do something else, a chained list we walk orsomething like that. For the "fast path" which is when we have a pci_devaround, we can either add it to dev_archdata or hijack the pci-devplatform_data (I don't think anything uses it, Grant, do you know ofanything ?)

The patches are already in -next and I won't rebase, so we need to fixit on top of the existing patches. Gavin, can you make a patch that putsit back into pci_dn to begin with, then we can contemplate what betterlong term solution we have ?